Dotting the I’S & Crossing the T’S

A discussion with my friend the deputy, about the extension of the parliament morally and realistically

Written by Nasser Kandil,

According to the available data of the future of the parliament, the one who is involved can only make a decision confusingly, because of his moral attitude through which he sees the extension is a political corruption, that deactivates the democratic process which has thousands of flaws, either in the election law and the rules of the electoral process, or according to the certainty that nothing would change in the balances of the parliament. This is just for changing the scenery or emerging new majority that can give hope, but the regularity of the electoral process remains an initiative condition that cannot be bargained on.

In addition and according to the available data, there is no opportunity for holding elections especially after the declaration of Al-Mustaqbal Movement’s boycott, regardless of the accuracy of the talk that ISIS will inherit Al-Mustaqbal Movement and whether there is any difference, or that the patriots and the nationals will inherit. In fact the boycott of Al-Mustaqbal Movement in these current conditions will deepen the sectarian division, and will inspire with that there was a Shiite’s voting fraud against the Sunnis representation, and where the treaty requires from the Shiite blocs to refrain from the participation in the election if this has happened.

Up to this point, every national deputy can say that the attitude of the President Nabih Berri is national and realistic, despite of the reservation of what he has said that ISIL will replace Al-Mustaqbal Movement’s vacancy if the elections have taken place.

The moral attitude needs who can express it, as well as the realistic attitude, and all the national parliamentary blocs are involving on how to combine between these two attitudes.

The Free Patriotic Movement has resolved the participation in the extension’s session depending on the realism and the national precognition, which preserves the institution which elects the president, and which probably refrains from presenting appeals or votes against the extension, while Amal Movement and Hezbollah have resolved probably the decision of the participation in the session and the voting against the extension.

My question for my friend the deputy was: “Is it still possible for all of us, to vote with yes for the extension on condition to lift the immunity of the deputy Khaled Daher, since it is the condition of extension for a parliament, in which the national identity is settled, just n order to support the army and to fight the terrorism. And no for the extension, which provides the terrorist movements a partnership in the profits of the extension, and allows them to own a parliamentary coverage?”

2014-11-02 | عدد القراءات 1484